reaction cause for concern

By Peter May

Stephen Harmison's decision to retire from one-day international cricket has been easily accepted in all quarters: accepted all too easily if England are to address the crushing disappointment of the current Ashes campaign.

There are good reasons why the announcement has raised few eyebrows.

Of course, the similar decision from Shane Warne, a man whose achievements place Harmison's litany of underachievement in harsh perspective, has rightly dominated the week's headlines.

And, as chairman of selectors David Graveney commented, it was not a big surprise from the big man.

After a torrid year and a half with white ball in hand, the news will have been mourned by the Sri Lankan top order more than the Barmy Army.

However, Graveney's point accepted, it is not a surprise but still a shock: in April next year not an eyebrow would have been raised, but December '06?

Harmison has effectively said that he has no interest in competing in a World Cup, nor in trying to make some amends against Australia in the upcoming VB Series.

Even given the rock-bottom expectations which now follow the England ODI set-up these are enormous occasions for any international cricketer - or at least ought to be.

Worryingly, apathy has been considered par for the course during 15 months of mediocrity.

Between Ashes series, England have lacked for concentration and application; this much is clear after the catastrophic defeat in Multan, woeful Test and ODI series against Sri Lanka and an embarrassing Champions Trophy showing.

The successes punctuating these failures have never been fully capitalised upon.

In 2005 England met Australia on the back of persistent success which had bred a winning mentality, this time they found that such an approach requires more than the flick of a switch.

Indeed, there has rarely been a better illustration of the Bob Paisley's observation that the danger with winning the championship is you're still doing a lap of honour six months later.

That England have lacked hunger and drive to establish a themselves as a world force in the long-run has in part been hidden by flawed opposition, but the last month has seen that shield removed.

Australia's players have been derided in some quarters for being a Dad's Army (something that might have proved influential had the ACB not employed the lightest of 12-month schedules) but it is testament to exceptional men that they are around to be derided.

It is one thing to want to play in the Ashes when nearer to 40 than 30, but quite another to achieve it as six men have this year.

Australia does not lack for committed and talented young cricketers seeking to kick in the international door but a whole generation has found stubborn, solid men unwilling to yield on the other side.

Compare this with England.

The players' sense that it was all downhill from the Oval was palpable on the open top bus tour and has never gone away: MBEs, Downing Street receptions and national deification will never return even if the urn does change hands again in 2009.

The nation's collective ecstasy was the product of 16 years' humiliation and eight weeks' high anxiety; the dozen winners - and in particular Andrew Flintoff, Michael Vaughan and Kevin Pietersen - are unlikely to make more money in the rest of their lives than they have since awaking to apocalyptic hangovers.

It is an increasingly popular view that these influences have contributed to England's disappointing recent form, but too little thought has been given to how they might still affect the future.

So, Harmison has retired from one-day internationals.

This is hardly unprecedented, but is more usual for players looking to elongate a career beyond the age of 32 or 33.

At 28 years old Harmison does not have that excuse, and indeed few would believe any pretence at seeking a longer career.

Given his lack of appetite for touring, how long before he refuses to travel for Tests and thus plunges the selectors back into the Graham Thorpe/Marcus Trescothick conundrum of when to bring back a clearly talented performer no longer able to make the commitments required of an international cricketer?

It can even be argued that Harmison has already reached that point: he cannot be forced to play ODIs but the decision not to attend the World Cup as an automatic selection betrays a fading desire to play the game.

If, as Graveney says, this is not unexpected then it still ought not to be accepted so readily.

While Trescothick's problems dwarf sporting issues, the ECB's job is to look after the whole of English cricket and their mis-management of the left-hander's breakdown has contributed to the team's chaotic Ashes preparation.

In terms of their duty to the England team, the ECB must now focus on ensuring that the players are markedly more Australian in their mental approach: the year-round schedule undoubtedly poses huge problems for star players and their handlers but a pick'n'mix culture is no viable solution.

In particular they must face up to the single issue which will most influence the team's fortunes: Flintoff's future availability.

To question the Lancastrian's commitment this winter would be a gross insult: he has, though foolishly, taken to carrying an entire team on his back, and all the time with an ankle injury inflicting short-term agony and long-term damage.

Flintoff expects the ankle to pose a problem for the remainder of his career, but shrewd management and selection could yet ensure a third Ashes series for the all-rounder.

But if the Trescothick and Harmison episodes teach us anything about the demands facing modern players, it is that the accent ought to be as much on mental preparedness as physical.

However strong Flintoff's appetite for cricket may currently be, given the success of the last three years and the painful challenges of the next three, how long before his older and less wholesome appetites return?

He is by all accounts a regular companion of Ian Botham, a hobby which will return him to 2002 fighting weight - around 3st2lb excess - in about three square meals.

He is rich, has a young family and unlike Pietersen has never seen on-field success as the foundation stone for any and all other future happiness.

The 2011 Ashes and World Cup are certainly out of reach; given his injury record the 2009 Ashes may even be a bridge too far: if not bowling 15 overs per day then it would take an enormous improvement in his batting to justify continued selection.

In England before the next Ashes is the Twenty20 World Cup, and Flintoff would be the unanimous choice among public and advertisers alike to captain the hosts.

But is this enough to justify in players' minds the travel, gym work and playing schedule which take a terrible toll on body, mind and personal life?

This need not be about Flintoff, of course, but he seems the most likely to follow his friends example.

If indulged any further then others will no doubt begin to consider their options, particularly in a team failing to do themselves justice.

Australia need never address such possible lack of hunger since their players' laurels remain unrested upon: as soon as Damien Martyn showed signs of waning concentration he was exiled to Hawaii.

For England, the issue does not look after itself and requires management; the absence of such management has contributed significantly to the unpreparedness of the team over the last month.

Between the current Ashes series and the next they have 14 major commitments: including the upcoming VB Series this will demand time away in each of the seven other big Test nations.

Harmison's decision belies a lack of hunger for international cricket, an indifference born out of 2005's unrepeatable heights and compounded by a gruelling future fixture list.

The big, as yet unaddressed, fear is that he is not the only one.